I might be wrong, but I would say in the second sentence the word but is being used like the phrase except for. She ate no lunch except she drank broth and juice. If the word but means except, then there is no comma.

I didn't remember it all. I remembered it saying that if the word but means except then no comma but the actual rule was In this sentence, but is being used to mean except. Because but isn’t starting an independent clause, the comma isn’t required.

I'm glad you had me clarify because originally I was focusing on the wrong thing. I was struggling with whether it meant except or not.

Jan, thanks for your reply. Jan and Shann, thanks for continuing to discuss this complicated topic.

glorybee wrote: But when you add the verb, the second part of the sentence becomes independent (with an implied "she').

I am still having difficulty with the placement of a comma after the independent clause but before the dependent clause. If I understand the website that Shann linked to, a comma is not needed if there is no subject in the second clause.

I am confused about the placement of commas in reference to strong (independent) and weak (dependent) clauses. I was under the impression that if a weak clause follows a strong clause, a comma is not needed to separate them.

For example (also from my manuscript):

1) Agnes gazed at her, but did not speak.

2) She ate no lunch but drank some juice and broth.

I don’t understand why the first sentence should have a comma before the dependent clause, but the second sentence should not.

Cinnamon Bear

I know Jan generally prefers to stay away from using most technical grammar terms, but since you used one, I think it is important to note that the heart of your confusion may be that you have mis-identified dependent clauses. Neither of these sentences has a dependent clause. Remember, a dependent clause must have both a subject and a verb, yet not express a complete idea.

What both of these sentences do have are compound verbs/compound predicates. Or in non-technical terms they both have two verbs related to the same subject. Gazed and speak both have the same subject: Agnes. Ate and drank both have the same subject: She. Neither sentence should have a comma, since you are not supposed to put a comma between the verbs in a compound predicate.

Steve
nlf.net
________
"When the Round Table is broken every man must follow Galahad or Mordred; middle
things are gone." C.S. Lewis
“The chief purpose of life … is to increase according to our capacity our knowledge of God by all the means we have, and to be moved by it to praise and thanks. To do as we say in the Gloria in Excelsis ... We praise you, we call you holy, we worship you, we proclaim your glory, we thank you for the greatness of your splendor.” J.R.R. Tolkien

swfdoc1 wrote:I know Jan generally prefers to stay away from using most technical grammar terms, but since you used one, I think it is important to note that the heart of your confusion may be that you have mis-identified dependent clauses. Neither of these sentences has a dependent clause. Remember, a dependent clause must have both a subject and a verb, yet not express a complete idea.

Steve, thanks so much for your post. And you are correct that I was misidentifying dependent clauses. I was looking at a website that provided examples, but not precise definitions.

I need both precise definitions and examples in order to understand a concept. I feel that knowing the correct technical term is very helpful in finding the correct information and in communicating about the concept with others.